I. Introduction

In the Philippines, defamation and harassment remain actionable both as crimes and civil wrongs. Defamation primarily falls under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and has been significantly expanded into the digital realm through Republic Act No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012). Harassment is addressed through multiple laws including the RPC, R.A. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Act), R.A. 11313 (Safe Spaces Act or Bawal Bastos Law), and provisions of the Cybercrime Law.

These offenses are taken seriously because they violate personal honor, dignity, and privacy — values deeply protected under Article II, Section 11 of the 1987 Constitution and the Civil Code provisions on human relations (Articles 19–36).

II. Defamation Under the Revised Penal Code (Articles 353–362)

A. Definition

Defamation is the public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, defect, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead (Art. 353, RPC).

B. Forms of Defamation

Libel (Written Defamation) – committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any similar means (Art. 355, RPC).
Slander (Oral Defamation) – defamation committed by oral means.
- Grave Slander – when the imputation is of a serious nature (e.g., accusing someone of a crime involving moral turpitude).
- Simple Slander – when the imputation is not serious but still offensive.

C. Elements of Defamation (Libel or Slander)

Allegation of a discreditable act or condition concerning another;
Publication or communication to a third person;
Identity of the victim (must be identifiable even if not named);
Existence of malice (presumed in libel unless privileged; must be proven in private libel after the ruling in Disini v. Secretary of Justice).

D. Malice

Malice in law – presumed in every defamatory imputation (Art. 354, RPC).
Privileged Communication (no presumption of malice):
- Absolutely privileged: Statements in Congress, judicial proceedings (Art. 354, No. 1 & 2).
- Qualifiedly privileged: Fair and true report of official proceedings, fair comment on matters of public interest (must be without malice).

E. Penalties

Libel: Prisión correccional in its minimum and medium periods (6 months & 1 day to 4 years & 2 months) or fine ranging from ₱200 to ₱6,000, or both.
Slander by deed: Arresto mayor (1 month & 1 day to 6 months).
Grave oral slander: Arresto mayor maximum to prisión correccional minimum.
Simple slander: Arresto menor or fine not exceeding ₱200.

III. Cyberlibel (R.A. 10175, Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, as amended)

A. Legal Basis

Section 4(c)(4) of R.A. 10175 punishes "libel" as defined under Article 355 of the RPC when committed through a computer system or any other similar means.

The Supreme Court in Disini v. Secretary of Justice (G.R. No. 203335, February 11, 2014) upheld the constitutionality of cyberlibel but struck down the "real-time collection of traffic data" and the "takedown clause."

B. Key Features of Cyberlibel

One degree higher penalty than traditional libel (prisión mayor minimum to medium: 6 years & 1 day to 10 years).
Online libel is punishable even if the post is accessible only to friends or private groups if a third person saw it.
Each access or "view" does not constitute a separate crime — there is only one crime regardless of number of views (one publication rule).
The author, editor, or administrator of a website/blog with defamatory content can be liable. Comments by third parties can make the moderator liable if not removed after notice (though this is still evolving in jurisprudence).
Re-posting, sharing, or reacting with emojis that amplify defamatory content can constitute aiding or abetting cyberlibel (punishable with the same penalty).

C. Prescription

Cyberlibel prescribes in 15 years (Act No. 3326 as amended by R.A. 10175).

IV. Harassment-Related Offenses

A. Unjust Vexation (Art. 287, RPC)

Any act that annoys, irritates, or vexes an innocent person without justifiable cause.
Penalty: Arresto menor (1–30 days) or fine ₱5,000–₱40,000 (as amended).
Most common charge for persistent annoying messages, prank calls, repeated tagging, etc.

B. Light Threats (Art. 283, RPC)

Penalty: Arresto mayor.

C. Grave Coercion (Art. 286, RPC)

If harassment involves force or intimidation to compel another to do something against their will.

D. Stalking

Covered under unjust vexation or grave threats.
If against women/children in dating or domestic relationship: R.A. 9262 (Anti-VAWC) includes psychological violence and stalking.

E. Safe Spaces Act (R.A. 11313, 2019) – Bawal Bastos Law

Covers gender-based sexual harassment in public spaces, streets, workplaces, educational institutions, and online platforms.

Punishable acts include:

Catcalling, wolf-whistling, unwanted invitations, misogynistic or homophobic slurs, persistent sending of sexual messages or images.
Online sexual harassment: Sending unsolicited nude photos, sexual remarks in comments/DMs, etc.
Penalties: ₱1,000–₱500,000 fine and/or imprisonment from 10 days to 6 months depending on gravity.
First-time offenders may undergo Gender Sensitivity Education.

F. Online Sexual Harassment under R.A. 10175 and R.A. 11313

Explicitly includes cyberstalking, cyberbullying with sexual undertones, and non-consensual sharing of intimate images.

G. Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act (R.A. 9995)

Punishes taking or sharing of private sexual photos/videos without consent ("revenge porn").

V. How to File a Complaint

A. Defamation/Cyberlibel

File a complaint-affidavit with the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor (NPS-DOJ).
For cyberlibel: Preferably file with the Anti-Cybercrime Division of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) or PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group first for technical investigation and preservation of evidence.
Required evidence:
- Screenshots with visible date/time/URL (use browser inspector or third-party tools like Page Vault).
- Notarized screenshots are preferred.
- Original device if possible.
- Witness affidavits.
- Certification from platform (Facebook, X, etc.) if obtainable via Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty or preservation request.

B. Harassment (Unjust Vexation, Safe Spaces Act, etc.)

If amount involved or penalty is low: May be filed directly with Municipal Trial Court (but usually goes through prosecutor).
For Safe Spaces Act violations: Can file with barangay first (except when committed by a public officer), then prosecutor or directly with court.
For VAWC: File with barangay for protection order, or directly with prosecutor/police.

C. Civil Action for Damages

May be filed separately or jointly with criminal case (Articles 33, 100, 2176 Civil Code).

Moral damages: ₱100,000–₱1,000,000+ depending on social standing of victim.
Exemplary damages common in high-profile cases.

VI. Defenses

Truth (only if the imputation involves public officers or public figures regarding official conduct).
Absence of malice.
Privileged communication.
Lack of identifiability.
Prescription.
Good faith and fair comment on matters of public interest.

VII. Important Supreme Court Rulings

Disini v. Secretary of Justice (2014) – upheld cyberlibel but declared original author only is liable for primary posting; sharing may constitute separate liability.
Maria Ressa v. People (ongoing as of 2025) – clarified that cyberlibel prescription starts from discovery, not posting date.
MVRS v. Islamic Da’wah Council – corporations can sue for libel if group libel affects business reputation.
Villarica v. People – reaction emojis can be defamatory if context shows malice.

VIII. Practical Advice for Complainants and Respondents

Preserve evidence immediately (use Archive.org, HTTrack, or official platform download tools).
File within prescription period.
Expect counter-charges (cyberlibel cases often involve counter-suits).
Settlement is allowed in defamation cases except when public interest is involved.

Defamation and harassment complaints in the Philippines remain potent tools for protecting personal dignity in both physical and digital spaces. While freedom of expression is guaranteed, it is not absolute — it ends where another person's honor begins.